Allahabad High Court
Ghanshyam Upadhyay vs State Of U.P. And Another on 26 September, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:186143
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10471 of 2023
Applicant :- Ghanshyam Upadhyay
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shahdab Alam, learned counsel for the informant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.217 of 2021, registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC at Police Station- Jeanpur, District Azamgarh with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, despite being the pending civil suit between the parties, the applicant is stated to have sold the said property by producing fake documents regarding the transfer of title and forging the court order.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The civil suit has been converted into criminal one by the informant and now the family members have got the matter settled between the parties and nothing remains there. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but have not disputed the said factum of compromise entered into between the parties.
7. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant-Ghanshyam Upadhyay be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
9. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 26.9.2023
Ravi Kant
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
